Vicisitudes en el tratamiento del daño moral por la jurisprudencia laboral peruana

The ideal of Legal certainty seems to elude us because of divergent and heterogeneous case law. In Peruvian labour case law, ruling of non-pecuniary damage cases often deviates from precedent criteria; thus, there is no safe criterion in matters such as –for example– its specific elements, or when d...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor: Briones Quispe, Milko
Tipo de recurso: artículo
Fecha de publicación:2019
País:Perú
Institución:Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
Repositorio:PUCP-Institucional
Idioma:español
OAI Identifier:oai:repositorio.pucp.edu.pe:20.500.14657/174114
Acceso en línea:http://revistas.pucp.edu.pe/index.php/themis/article/view/21986/21392
https://doi.org/10.18800/themis.201901.014
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palabra clave:Daño moral
Daños extrapatrimoniales
Resarcimiento
Despido arbitrario
Despido incausado
Despido fraudulento
https://purl.org/pe-repo/ocde/ford#5.05.01
Descripción
Sumario:The ideal of Legal certainty seems to elude us because of divergent and heterogeneous case law. In Peruvian labour case law, ruling of non-pecuniary damage cases often deviates from precedent criteria; thus, there is no safe criterion in matters such as –for example– its specific elements, or when does someone is obliged to prove it or when presumptions are available.This article aims to highlight the lack of stability among the non-pecuniary damage labour case law ruling criteria. The author begins by introducing the concept and premises of non-pecuniary damage from tort law theory. Furthermore, the author reflects on Peruvian labour case law ruling criteria referred to compensation for non-pecuniary damage in the context of arbitrary, uncaused or fraudulent dismissal. At last, the author delves on the need of adhering to precedent criteria for the ruling of non-pecuniary damage cases.